T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T KE L L Y G . ME L T ON , P la in tif

f - A p p e lla n t, v. C OMMI S S I ON E R OF S OC I AL S E C UR I T Y A DMI NI S T R AT I ON , D ef

endant- A pp el l ee . N o. 10- 35953 D . C. N o . 3 : 0 9 - c v - 0 1 0 0 0 - BR ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt

f orthe D i s tr i c tof

O r e gon A nnaJ . B r ow n, D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d J ul y12, 2011 ** P ort l a nd, O r e gon B efo re: G O O D W IN , P R E G E R S O N , an dM . S M IT H , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P l a i nt i f f - A ppe l l a ntK e l l yM e l t on appe a l s the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s or de rr e m a ndi ng her c l ai m for di sabi l i ty and supp l em ent al soci al se curi ty benef i t s f or further adm i ni stra t i ve proceedi ng s. T he di stri ctcourtfoun d thatthe A dm i ni stra t i ve L aw 

# FI LED JU L 14 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALSM el t on di d n ot“ spec i fi ca l l y and di st i nct l y” ar gu e i n h erop eni ng bri ef that 1 th e A L Jim p r o p e r lyr e

je c te dD r . A n d e r s o n ’s o p in io n . T h u s , th is is s u e is w a iv e d . Se e Pa la d i n As s o c s . , I

n c . v . Mo n t. Po we rCo . , 328 F . 3d 1145, 1164 ( 9th C i r . 2003) ( not i ng tha tw e “ or di na r i l yw i l l notc ons i de rm a tt e r s on appe a l tha ta r e not spec i fi ca l l y and di st i nct l y argued i n an app el l ant ’ s openi ng bri ef ”) . 2 Judg e ( A L J) had com m i tt ed three errors and rem anded M el t on ’ s c as e f or further a d m in is tr a tiv e p r o c e e d in g s . M e lto n a r g u e s th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u rt e rr e dw h e n it up hel d the partof the A L J’ s dec i si on thatgave l i tt l e w ei gh tt o the op i ni on s of three tre at i ng ph ys i ci ans r egar di ng M el t on ’ s l i m i t at i on s, and thatthe di stri ctcourt 1 s h o u ldh a v e r e m a n d e dth e c a s e f o ra n im m e d ia te a w a r do f b e n e f its . T he pa rt i e s a r e f

a m i l i a rw i th the f

a c t s , w hi c h w e r e pe a the r e onl yt o the e xt e ntne c e s s a ryt o e xpl a i n ourde c i s i on. W e ha ve j ur i s di c t i on pur s ua ntt o 28 U . S . C . § 1291, a nd w e a f f i rm the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s de c i s i on t o r e m a nd thi s c a s e f or fu rth er p ro ceed i n g s. T he opi ni ons of

tr e a t i ng phy s i c i a ns a r e gi ve n gr e a t e rw e i ghttha n thos e of n o n - tr e a tin g p h y s ic ia n s . T urner v . C om m ’rof

So c. Sec. , 6 1 3 F .3 d1 2 1 7 , 1 2 2 2 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 1 0 ) . W h e r e th e r e is c o n f lic tin g m e d ic a l e v id e n c e , th e A L Jm u s t s ta te

“ s pe c i f i c a nd l e gi t i m a t e r e a s ons tha ta r e s upport e d bys ubs t a nt i a l e vi de nc e ” i n the r e c o r df o rr e je c tin g atr e a tin g p h y s ic ia n ’s o p in io n . R yan v. C om m ’rof

So c. Sec. , 52 8 F . 3d 11 94 , 11 98 (9th C i r. 20 08 ).3

T w o of the A L J ’ s r e a s ons f

ordi s c r e di t i ng D r . G i bby - S m i th’ s opi ni on r e ga r di ng M e l t on’ s “ m a rke d” l i m i t a t i ons i n aw ork e nvi r onm e nta r e “ s pe c i f i c a nd le g itim a te r e a s o n s th a t a r e s u p p o rte db ys u b s ta n tia l e v id e n c e ” in th e r e c o r d . I d. F i rst , th e A L J co rrect l y fo u n dth atG i b b y-S m i th ’ s o p i n i o n w as b ased al m o st e n tir e lyo n M e lto n ’s s e lf - r e p o rtin g , w h ic h th e A L Jf o u n dn o t f

u llyc r e d ib le , a f in d in g M e lto n d o e s n o t c h a lle n g e o n ap p e a l. Se e T om m as e t t iv . A s tr ue , 533 F . 3d 1 0 3 5 , 1 0 4 1 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 8 ) ( “A n A L Jm a yr e je c t atr e a tin g p h y s ic ia n ’s o p in io n if it i s ba s e d t o a la r

g e ex te n t o n ac la im a n t’s s e lf - r e p o rts th a t h a v e b e e n p r o p e r ly d is c o u n te da s in c r e d ib le .” ( q u o ta tio n m a rk s a n dc ita tio n o m itte d ) ( e m p h a s is added)). S ec on d, D r. G i bb y- S m i th p rovi ded i ncon si st entansw er s on h er ev al u at i o n fo rm . S h e g av e M el t o n a G A F sco re o f 5 5 , w h i ch i n d i cat es “ m o de r a te ” di f f i c ul tyi n s oc i a l , oc c upa t i ona l , ors c hool f unc t i oni ng. A m . P s y c hi a tr i c A s s ’ n, D i a g n o st i c a n d

S ta t ist i ca l

M a n u a l o f Men ta l D iso rders 34 ( 4th e d. 2000) . O n the s a m e f orm , D r . G i bby - S m i th i ndi c a t e d M e l t on ha d “ m arke d” lim ita tio n s in d a ily a c t i vi t i e s a nd i n m a i nt a i ni ng s oc i a l f unc t i oni ng, m e a ni ng m or e tha n m ode r a t e , but le s s th a n e x tr e m e . 2 0 C .F .R . P t. 4 0 4 , S u b p t. P , A p p . 1 § 1 2 .0 0 C ; 2 0 C .F .R . § 404. 1520a . T he A L Jr e a s onabl yr e l i e d upon thi s i nt e rna l i nc ons i s t e nc yf or d is c r e d itin g D r . G ib b y - S m ith ’s o p in io n . See B a yl iss v. B a rn h a rt , 427 F . 3d 1211,4

1 2 1 6 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) ( f

in d in g th a t a n A L Jm a yc ite in te rn a l in c o n s is te n c ie s in e v a lu a tin g ap h y s ic ia n ’s o p in io n ) . T he A L J a l so corr ec t l y poi nt ed t o speci fi c e xam pl es of contra di ct i on s i n D r. S u lta n y ’s o w n a n s w e r s o n a n a s s e s s m e n t f o rm , a n dp r o v id e da d d itio n a l le g itim a te r e a s o n s f o rq u e s tio n in g th e r e liab ilityo f D r . S u lta n y ’s r e s p o n s e s o n th is f o rm . A c c or di ngl y , the A L Jpr ope r l yr e j e c t e d D r . S ul t a ny ’ s r e s pons e s a f t e rs t a t i ng

“ s pe c i f i c a nd l e gi t i m a t e r e a s ons tha ta r e s upport e d bys ubs t a nt i a l e vi de nc e ” i n the r e c o r d . R

y an , 5 2 8 F .3 da t 1 1 9 8 ; see a l so B a yl iss , 427 F . 3d a t1216. F i nal l y, the A L J properl y di sc re di t ed D r. S i m on ’ s answ er s on the “ M edi ca l O pi ni on R e ga r di ng A bi l i tyt o W ork” f orm be c aus e the f

orm w a s uns i gne d a nd c o n tr a d ic te dD r . S im o n ’s o w n tr e a tm e n t r e c o r d s . Se e i d. R em and for further a dm i ni stra t i ve proceedi ng s i s app ropri at e w here there ar e out st andi ng i ss ues thatm ustbe re sol ved b ef ore adi sabi l i ty det erm i nat i on can be m a de , a nd i ti s notc l e a rf r om the r e c or d tha tthe A L Jw oul d be r e qui r e d t o f i nd th e c la im a n t d is ab le dif

a ll th e e v id e n c e w e r e p r o p e r lye v a lu a te d . See V asqu ez v. A s tr ue , 5 7 2 F .3 d5 8 6 , 5 9 3 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 9 ) . H er e, there ar e out st andi ng i ss ues the A L J m ustconsi der on rem and b ef ore a fi nd i ng of di sabi l i ty c an be m ade, i ncl ud i ng (1) det erm i ni ng w hatw ei gh tt o aff ord the l ayw i tness t es t i m on y; (2) i ncorpo ra t i ng i n M el t on ’ s r es i du al funct i on al5

c apa c i tyhe rl i m i t a t i ons i n m a i nt a i ni ng c onc e ntr a t i on, pe r s i s t e nc e , orpa c e ; a nd ( 3) p o s in g a n a c c u r a te h yp o th e tic a l to th e v o c a tio n a l e x p e rt. B ec ause there ar e “s u f f ic ie n t u n a n s w e r e dq u e s tio n s in th e r e c o r d ,” th e d is tr ic t c o u rt’s d e c is io n to r e m a nd the c a s e f

orf urthe ra dm i ni s tr a t i ve pr oc e e di ngs w a s nota n abus e of d is c r e tio n . H

arm an v. Apf

el , 21 1 F . 3d 11 72 , 11 80 (9th C i r. 20 00 ). AF F I RME D.